Albany @ Loyola-Chicago on Mon. Dec. 28, 2009
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 loyolagrad88 |
Albany @ Loyola-Chicago on Mon. Dec. 28, 2009 |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 447 (June 26, 2009 3:09 PM) |
|||
|
rowdie09 |
Hold On! | ||
|
Posts: 62 (June 27, 2009 5:42 PM) |
It seems as if they are still contemplating about when exactly the game is. We shouldn't be to sure of this date being exact.
|
||
|
Titans 2000 |
|||
|
Posts: 23 (July 4, 2009 9:30 AM) |
For what its worth the Titans play Albany as well |
||
|
senex |
|||
|
Posts: 729 (July 4, 2009 3:03 PM) Larry Farmer Club |
If I understand it correctly, the Coaches v. Cancer "tournament" has the weirdest setup of all time.
Please correct me if I am going wrong somewhere, but here is what seems to me to be the way it will work. There are 12 teams, which will play at four sites, Syracuse, North Carolina, Ohio State and Cal, with three teams at each site. The host team apparently plays both of the visitors and then moves on to MSG whether it wins two, one or none of these preliminary games. The visitors in the preliminary round play only one game, against the host. The eight visiting teams are then divided into two four-team groups and each plays a round-robin with the other three in its group. I can understand entering a tournament in which the possibility of playing in MSG exists, even though it may be a longshot. But what earthly reason would tempt an AD or coach to enter a tournament which their team has no possible chance of winning. Theoretically, two of the eight visiting teams could finish with 4-0 records and none of the four host teams could finish better than 2-2. But one of the hosts would be considered the "champion." Perhaps I am overly cynical, but the only answer I can think of to my question is -- you'll never believe this -- money. This format has achieved what I used to think was impossible, making the HL tourney format look rational. |
||
|
Ramblin On |
|||
|
Posts: 832 (July 4, 2009 11:13 PM) Benchwarmer Club |
Blame Gardner-Webb for defeating Kentucky at Rupp Arena in the C vs. C tournament two years ago. The ESPN ratings for the Connecticut v. Gardner Webb game
probably weren't very high.
The NCAA itself seems to have taken care of the problem of mid-majors advancing a long way in the tournament like they did the George Mason year by giving mid majors fewer at large bids (seven in 2006; four each the last two tournaments), scheduling mid-majors against each other in the first round, and also by sacrificing well-known mid majors in the Saturday and Sunday games by underseeding them (seeds way below their rpi) with the 7-10 death seeds against top programs (see Butler v. Tenn in 2008 and Butler v. North Carolina at Greensboro Coliseum if Butler had won in the first round in 2009). Remember when the MVC actually got multiple teams into the tournament and won multiple games every year not so long ago. Now they are a one team conference. |
||
This game is a twist as part of the Coach's vs. Cancer scheduling platform. The C vs. C format is set up so that this year 4 teams are
guaranteed to play in MSG. I was shocked to hear that our pal Johnie LaLoser LeCrone was not the organizer
